An evaluation of a Bayesian method of dose escalation based on bivariate binary responses

Recently, various approaches have been suggested for dose escalation studies based on observations of both undesirable events and evidence of therapeutic benefit. This article concerns a Bayesian approach to dose escalation that requires the user to make numerous design decisions relating to the number of doses to make available, the choice of the prior distribution, the imposition of safety constraints and stopping rules, and the criteria by which the design is to be optimized. Results are presented of a substantial simulation study conducted to investigate the influence of some of these factors on the safety and the accuracy of the procedure with a view toward providing general guidance for investigators conducting such studies. The Bayesian procedures evaluated use logistic regression to model the two responses, which are both assumed to be binary. The simulation study is based on features of a recently completed study of a compound with potential benefit to patients suffering from inflammatory diseases of the lung.

The sequential analysis of repeated binary responses: a score test for the case of three time points

In this paper a robust method is developed for the analysis of data consisting of repeated binary observations taken at up to three fixed time points on each subject. The primary objective is to compare outcomes at the last time point, using earlier observations to predict this for subjects with incomplete records. A score test is derived. The method is developed for application to sequential clinical trials, as at interim analyses there will be many incomplete records occurring in non-informative patterns. Motivation for the methodology comes from experience with clinical trials in stroke and head injury, and data from one such trial is used to illustrate the approach. Extensions to more than three time points and to allow for stratification are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A score test for binary data with patient non-compliance

A score test is developed for binary clinical trial data, which incorporates patient non-compliance while respecting randomization. It is assumed in this paper that compliance is all-or-nothing, in the sense that a patient either accepts all of the treatment assigned as specified in the protocol, or none of it. Direct analytic comparisons of the adjusted test statistic for both the score test and the likelihood ratio test are made with the corresponding test statistics that adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. It is shown that no gain in power is possible over the intention-to-treat analysis, by adjusting for patient non-compliance. Sample size formulae are derived and simulation studies are used to demonstrate that the sample size approximation holds. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Active-control trials with binary data: a comparison of methods for testing superiority or non-inferiority using the odds ratio

This paper considers methods for testing for superiority or non-inferiority in active-control trials with binary data, when the relative treatment effect is expressed as an odds ratio. Three asymptotic tests for the log-odds ratio based on the unconditional binary likelihood are presented, namely the likelihood ratio, Wald and score tests. All three tests can be implemented straightforwardly in standard statistical software packages, as can the corresponding confidence intervals. Simulations indicate that the three alternatives are similar in terms of the Type I error, with values close to the nominal level. However, when the non-inferiority margin becomes large, the score test slightly exceeds the nominal level. In general, the highest power is obtained from the score test, although all three tests are similar and the observed differences in power are not of practical importance. Copyright (C) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Bayesian design and conduct of phase II single-arm clinical trials with binary outcomes: a tutorial

The aim of phase II single-arm clinical trials of a new drug is to determine whether it has sufficient promising activity to warrant its further development. For the last several years Bayesian statistical methods have been proposed and used. Bayesian approaches are ideal for earlier phase trials as they take into account information that accrues during a trial. Predictive probabilities are then updated and so become more accurate as the trial progresses. Suitable priors can act as pseudo samples, which make small sample clinical trials more informative. Thus patients have better chances to receive better treatments. The goal of this paper is to provide a tutorial for statisticians who use Bayesian methods for the first time or investigators who have some statistical background. In addition, real data from three clinical trials are presented as examples to illustrate how to conduct a Bayesian approach for phase II single-arm clinical trials with binary outcomes.

Bayesian decision procedures for binary and continuous bivariate dose-escalation studies

In this paper, Bayesian decision procedures are developed for dose-escalation studies based on binary measures of undesirable events and continuous measures of therapeutic benefit. The methods generalize earlier approaches where undesirable events and therapeutic benefit are both binary. A logistic regression model is used to model the binary responses, while a linear regression model is used to model the continuous responses. Prior distributions for the unknown model parameters are suggested. A gain function is discussed and an optional safety constraint is included. Copyright (C) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A practical approach to a multi-level analysis with a sparse binary outcome within a large surgical trial

Objectives: To assess the potential source of variation that surgeon may add to patient outcome in a clinical trial of surgical procedures. Methods: Two large (n = 1380) parallel multicentre randomized surgical trials were undertaken to compare laparoscopically assisted hysterectomy with conventional methods of abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy; involving 43 surgeons. The primary end point of the trial was the occurrence of at least one major complication. Patients were nested within surgeons giving the data set a hierarchical structure. A total of 10% of patients had at least one major complication, that is, a sparse binary outcome variable. A linear mixed logistic regression model (with logit link function) was used to model the probability of a major complication, with surgeon fitted as a random effect. Models were fitted using the method of maximum likelihood in SAS((R)). Results: There were many convergence problems. These were resolved using a variety of approaches including; treating all effects as fixed for the initial model building; modelling the variance of a parameter on a logarithmic scale and centring of continuous covariates. The initial model building process indicated no significant 'type of operation' across surgeon interaction effect in either trial, the 'type of operation' term was highly significant in the abdominal trial, and the 'surgeon' term was not significant in either trial. Conclusions: The analysis did not find a surgeon effect but it is difficult to conclude that there was not a difference between surgeons. The statistical test may have lacked sufficient power, the variance estimates were small with large standard errors, indicating that the precision of the variance estimates may be questionable.